G. P. Mathur, J. - (1.) This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment dated 23-7-2002 of Allahabad High Court by which the scheme dated 13-2-1986 published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the approved scheme published on 29-5-1993 was quashed.
(2.) In order to appreciate the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary to mention the essential facts, as the case has a long history. The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short UPSRTC) prepared a draft scheme to nationalize Saharanpur-Shahdara-Delhi route and the same was published on 29-9-1959 in accordance with Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the old Act). The scheme was challenged by a number of operators and the High Court by its judgments dated 31-10-1961 and 7-2-1962 upheld the scheme as against 50 operators, but quashed the same as against 32 and 18 operators who had filed two groups of writ petitions on the ground that they should be afforded an opportunity of hearing. In appeal, the judgment of the High Court was upheld by this Court in Civil Appeal No. 1616 of 1968 decided on 3-4-1968 (Jeewan Nath Wahal vs. STAT). The hearing of the objections could not take place on account of interim orders passed in various suits, which were filed by some of these operators, and as a result, the scheme remained pending for over 20 years. Finally, the matter again came up to this Court and a two-Judge Bench quashed the scheme by the judgment dated 23-8-1985 on the ground that the delay of 26 years in disposing of the objections had resulted in violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. It was, however, left open to State Transport Undertaking to publish a fresh draft scheme if it was necessary to do so. The judgment is reported in (1985) 4 SCC 169 (Shri Chand vs. Govt. of U.P.)
(3.) The UPSRTC thereafter published a fresh scheme covering in all 39 routes which was published on 13.2.1986 under Section 68-C of the old Act. The scheme not only covered Sharanpur-Shahdara-Delhi route, but also 38 other routes. Objections were filed against the scheme and before they could be finally decided, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 1988 Act) came into force w.e.f. 1-7-1989 repealing the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The competent authority thereafter held that the proposed scheme had lapsed by virtue of Section 100(4) of the 1988 Act. The UPSRTC preferred a writ petition but the High Court also took the view that the scheme had lapsed and accordingly upheld the order of the competent authority and dismissed the writ petition. Some of the existing operators challenged the grant of permits under Section 80 of the 1988 Act by filing writ petitions, but the same were also dismissed. The appeal against the decision of the High Court was allowed by this Court on 31-3-1992 and the grant of permits under Section 80 of 1988 Act to the respondents/private operators of Civil Appeal No. 1198 of 1992 and others on the respective routes, parts or portions of the nationalized route of the draft scheme dated 13-2-1986 was quashed. The competent authority was directed to approve the draft scheme within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the judgment and publish the same in the Gazette. The judgment of this Court is reported in (1992) 2 SCC 620 (Ram Krishna Verma and others vs. State of U.P. and others). While the competent authority was hearing the objections, the State Government published a notification on 29-5-1993 whereby the draft scheme published on 13-2-1986 under Section 68-C of the old Act was approved. The notification specifically mentioned that the same was being done in view of the directions given by Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 1198, 1199, 1200 and 1201 of 1992 (Ram Krishna Vermas case (supra). The approved scheme covered all the 39 routes, which were proposed in the draft scheme published on 13-2-1986. Feeling aggrieved by the approved scheme dated 29-5-1993 several operators filed writ petitions in Allahabad High Court but the same were dismissed on 19-11-1999 on the ground that the scheme stood approved by the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Krishna Verma (supra) and also Nisar Ahmad vs. State of U.P. (1994) 3 Suppl. SCC 460. The appeals preferred against the judgment of the High Court were allowed by this Court on 1-5-2001 and the judgment is reported in (2001) 5 SCC 762 (Gajraj Singh and others vs. State of U.P. and others). It was held that the decision in Ram Krishna Vermas case (supra) was confined only to one route namely, Shahranpur-Shahdara-Delhi route, and as a result of the said decision the draft scheme stood approved only with regard to the said route. The notification published on 13-2-1986 included not only the Shahranpur-Shahdara-Delhi route, but also 38 others routes and consequently the scheme had not been approved with regard to these 38 routes and objections filed thereto required to be considered on merits. The operative portion of the judgment is being reproduced below : "12. The appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment of the High Court dated 19-11-1999 is set aside. The writ petitions are partly allowed. It is directed that the objections filed against the draft scheme dated 13-2-1986 insofar as they relate to the 38 routes listed at Serial Nos. 2 to 39 of the scheme, shall be heard and disposed of by the competent authority on their own merits and in accordance with law for which purpose the competent authority shall, within a period of four weeks from today, appoint and notify a date for hearing. We make it clear that only such of the objections shall be available to be heard and decided as were filed within 30 days of the date of publication of the draft scheme in the Official Gazette and which are maintainable and available to be heard in accordance with Section 68-D of the 1939 Act read with sub-section (2) of Section 100 of the 1988 Act .................. ................... If all the objections or any of them are allowed, the draft scheme shall meet the fate consistently with the decision on objections and the approved scheme dated 29-5-1993 shall be accordingly modified or annulled insofar as the routes specified at Serial Nos. 2 to 39 are concerned. In the event of the objections being dismissed, the approved scheme, as notified on 29-5-1993, shall continue to remain in operation. At the risk of repetition we would like to make it clear that insofar as Saharanpur-Delhi route is concerned, no objection in that regard shall be heard and the scheme as regards the said route shall be deemed to have been approved and maintained in terms of this Courts direction in Ram Krishna Verma case." ;